Yup. Doesn’t matter what the freaking Left thinks.
PEOPLE OF KENTUCKY: Submit a signed referendum in Kentucky for a special ballot (I don’t care how much it costs, it’s worth it) to outlaw the unconstitutional federal act of overturning Kentucky’s anti-gay-marriage laws with the State of Kentucky pledging to protect its citizens from this unconstitutional federal tyranny.
Besides, in her case she is not the one breaking the law as defined by her state legislature and the people’s vote which was 75% for defining marriage in the normal way. The judges are the ones with contempt for the law.
Average people people like Kim Davis are held in contempt and jailed.
What law? Does Kentucky actually have a validly legislated law on the books stating marriage licenses must be issued to same-sex couples?
we need marriage sanctuaries for sure
Kim Davis christian Martyr-put in jail by an unjust Temple Court High Priest just like Peter and the other Apostles in the Acts of the Apostles Chapters 4: and 5: Time for Christians everywhere to stand up and ROAR Time for Mass Christian civil disobedience.
She isn’t breaking a law, she is refusing to comply with a judges mandate.
Kim Davis is an elected official. She was elected PRIOR to this new law. She can and should argue that fact. She must be allowed a conscience clause.
The County Sheriff needs to arrest this judge for violations of civil rights under false color of authority.
L
Everybody keeps saying she broke the law but I have yet to hear what law she broke. Also there’s the fact that conscience objections have a long history in America without resulting in jail.
In the case of jury nullification there is no recourse at all. If a judge sets aside a jury verdict there is a chance of appeal but its a slim chance. In the case of a conscientious objector they’re given another duty or excused outright. In each case its a matter of someone refusing to do something against their conscience. ( A jury can’t convict where no law has been broken and a Judge can’t set aside a not guilty jury verdict) Its always no.
While we may not be able to jail Obama for refusing to enforce the existing laws, that doesn’t make the law cease to be. Its particularly hard to do and congress doesn’t have the will but the law can be enforced even if he won’t. On the other hand, Obama has passed many decrees that force others to do things against their will.
The headline contains a misnomer, one that is damaging to our position.
Kim Davis is not breaking the law. She is upholding the law.
It is the courts who have become lawless. They are demanding that she breach her oath of office by putting her signature on a fraudulent document.
Her good-faith belief is simply not a viable defense,” Bunning said. “Oaths mean things.”
Earth to Judge Bunning: She did take an oath - To uphold the U. S. Constitution AND the Constitution of the State of Kentucky and she is doing exactly that. Or do you imagine you and the Supreme Soviet also have the authority to invalidate or nullify State Constitutions?
Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.
Kentucky Constitutional Amendment 1
An honest question.
Who today is more inclined to break the rules?
Conservatives or Liberals?
Break the rules and even some laws that they find violate their constitutional rights?
We must ask, “Who is currently writing those rules?”
Does the left still think it is the “right” that is in charge?
I don’t think so.
By and large, Conservatives are or have tended to be law abiding citizens, while it was the liberals that pushed the boundaries of what was both “lawful or acceptable”.
It seems to me that the tide has turned.
There was a time in which the freak parade was the group challenging the “authority” and now that they are the authority some seem to be happy making the rules and forcing people to follow them.
I think we have come full circle.
It explains the political rise of both libertarians and virtually any candidate that is “outside” of the system.
Personally, I want to break their rules.
Do Democrats/liberals really want to follow politicians that want to create more rules?
So many political songs of the 1960’s and 70’s where anti-establishment and now that they are the establishment, do those feelings still apply?
Rebel Rebel?
I see no difference between what she is doing and cities like San Fransisco declaring themselves sanctuaries for illegal aliens except federal marshals aren’t taking the city supervisors off to jail.
It’s a shame that things have come to this and I hate to sound so jaded, but I really think that going to jail will be the best thing that could possibly have happened to this lady’s political future. She should look around for a Congressional seat.
Of course it is. That's why Petreaus was crucified and Hillary gets to skate.